The Debate Behind Disability Hiring

A proposed rule would force businesses to hire disabled workers. Why is that making companies with existing disability programs uneasy?

By
Sara Cann

Julie Williard's productivity is audible from across the room. The 25-year-old is working at a conveyor belt that runs through a sprawling Walgreens distribution center in Windsor, Connecticut, tossing tubes of toothpaste and gels into plastic bins, creating a staccato that resonates above the background chorus of buzzing machinery and beeping forklifts. "I try to get my hands on fire," says Williard. "I want to work quickly."

Williard is sorting merchandise into tubs bound for the company's shipping department, and unless you spoke with her, it would be difficult to tell that she's partially deaf and has Velocardiofacial syndrome, a genetic disorder that can cause learning disabilities and developmental delays. "You see that line?" says Walgreens disability outreach manager Joe Wendover, pointing to a monitor. "It shows Julie's gone through 900 cases an hour when she only needs to do 756. She's a rock star."

At a time when many workers are unreliable, this is a pool of laborers that can get the job done.

As companies such as AMC Theatres, Home Depot, and Microsoft can attest, disabled workers can be a great asset. But only about 20% of Americans with a physical or cognitive disability participate in the traditional workforce, and of that group 14% are unemployed—roughly twice the nondisabled rate. A regulation being pushed by the Department of Labor would try to improve those numbers by requiring any company with a federal contract worth $10,000 or more to give 7% of its jobs to people with disabilities. If passed, roughly 200,000 companies would be affected. For very different reasons, both companies with and without disability programs are worried about the proposal.

BE INCLUSIVE
The phrasing of equal employment policies often only mentions women and minorities, says Barbara Otto, CEO of Health & Disability Advocates. Phrases like "including those with disabilities" should be added to all HR documents.

TRACK CHANGES
Disability consultant James Emmett suggests creating a public list of adjustments the company has made
to accommodate disabled employees. That can help managers who have similar issues.

NIX IGNORANCE
"People tend to walk on eggshells around disabled coworkers," says Emmett. "That's often a barrier when
implementing a disability workforce." Holding awareness programs can help staffers loosen up.

GUIDE COACHES
State agencies may assign job coaches to shadow disabled employees who need help. Coaches aren't company employees, so former AMC Theatres exec Andy Traub established "Rules of Engagement" that outline what AMC expects of them.

SHOOT STRAIGHT
"Bosses are often afraid to give feedback because they think disabled employees have been through enough," says Emmett. But giving and documenting feedback builds a stronger worker and protects
against wrongful-termination lawsuits.

As the mother of an autistic child, Heather Davis, a senior managing director at financial services firm TIAA-CREF, knows firsthand that autistic people often have the ability to focus on repetitive tasks for long periods of time—a valuable skill for line workers. That trait has contributed to the success of TIAA-CREF's Fruits of Employment disability program, which Davis founded in 2008, and presently employees 24 people. New research from Walgreens suggests that this group makes for a particularly stable workforce. A study of its distribution centers by the American Society of Safety Engineers found that workers with disabilities had a turnover rate 48% lower than that of the nondisabled population, with medical costs 67% lower and time-off expenses 73% lower. "At a time when many workers are unreliable, this is a pool of laborers that can get the job done," says Davis.

Doing this right takes time. The Walgreens disability outreach dates back to 2002, when Randy Lewis, then the company's senior vice president of supply chain and logistics, suggested making a new warehouse in Anderson, South Carolina, disability-friendly by switching from text-based to image-based equipment. The program launched in 2007 and was such a success that Walgreens next built the Windsor center, where roughly half of the staff has some manner of physical or cognitive disability. Windsor is the company's safest, most productive warehouse. Across Walgreens's 21 distribution centers, 10% of its employees are disabled; the company would like to increase that slice to 20%.

Implementing a disability program requires great flexibility, often in surprising areas. Andy Traub, then the director of recruitment at AMC Theatres, had to revamp the hiring process when his company launched its FOCUS employment program in 2010. A traditional interview involved asking applicants about prior work experience, but many people with disabilities have never had a job. Instead, AMC started walking applicants through the building to show them what their responsibilities might be. By gauging the candidates' reactions to various tasks, AMC can match employees with a job that best suits them.

Chris Pepe transfers Walgreens products from the original packaging to storage tubs. | Photo by Lisa KeresziJulie Williard's sorting skills are second to none. "It feels like home here," she says of the Walgreens facility. | Photo by Lisa Kereszi

That's a creative response, but it also adds one more step to the nonrevenue-producing hiring process—which is just the sort of bureaucracy that some critics fear could become mandatory. The Department of Labor's proposed regulation is actually an amendment intended to give teeth to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which established workplace protections for disabled Americans but lacked an active prescription for change. Besides creating a hiring quota, the amendment may also require companies to do such things as ask employees to voluntarily disclose a disability pre- and post-hiring, partner with three state employment assistance agencies, and increase data collection about evaluations and hiring of nondisabled versus disabled employees. Companies violating the regulations could have their contracts terminated and payments withheld. The stipulations are strict, but as Patricia Shiu, director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, said in a December 2011 press release, "What is measured gets done."

But compliance may not come cheap, and estimates of the costs vary wildly. A study by the Associated General Contractors of America claims that the quota would cost the average construction firm at least $14,000 a year per project site—far more than the estimated annual cost of $473 outlined in the amendment. And a financial breakdown published by the HR Policy Association found that costs to the 200,000 potentially affected companies would be at least $5.9 billion the first year and more than $2.6 billion per annum afterward. Another point of contention is the requirement that companies work with state employment agencies rather than independent ones. Deb Russell, a manager of diversity and inclusion at Walgreens, points out that while some state agencies do a good job of pairing companies with talent, others don't. "We want to partner with the agencies we prefer," she explains, "rather than be told who to do business with."

There's no timetable in place for resolution of the amendment; all a Department of Labor spokesperson will say is that "they're working on it." But whatever happens, companies that dive into the disabled workforce will discover many benefits, including a PR boost: According to a 2005 study published in the Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 92% of Americans view companies that hire people with disabilities more favorably than those that do not.

REP. Dennis J. KucinichDemocratic congressman from OhioYEA "It's a simple edict. It's grounded in common sense. If you want to do business with the federal government, you will treat our citizens fairly."

Dana BottenfieldDirector of HR Info Systems, St. Jude Children's Research HospitalNAY "The effort, resources, and cost to comply with the [amendment] creates significant burdens and barriers... Our team is not focused on providing a fair and diverse workplace, but instead on surviving our next audit."

William E. Kiernan Director, Institute for Community Inclusion, UMass BostonYEA "Concerns about excessive costs for implementation and data collection are overshadowed by the economic costs to American society when we allow this untapped work-force to remain marginalized and nonproductive."

Rep. Todd RokitaRepublican congressman from IndianaNAY Potential violations created by the amendment "are a classic example of the right hand not knowing—or, more offensively, not caring—what the other hand's doing and asking business, the engine of our economy, to try to interpret all that."

Adrienne G. TilborDirector of Operations, Children's National Medical CenterYEA "Most of the [disabled] children that my colleagues and I treat have shown no aspirations for a career because they feel that there are no career opportunities beyond high school. This [amendment] would open up a world of opportunity and promise."

Add New Comment

11Comments

Something needs to be done. What companies are doing is activity avoiding hiring anyone who has a disability. The the game that is played here in Boulder County, Colorado is that an contact from placement for people with disabilities is directed to a voice mail that is never answered. There are clients at the Department of Rehabilitation with college degrees who never get a chance to even talk to an employer since the counsels can not set any appointments. The thinking is that people with disabilities will simply cost the company money and hassle. Meanwhile clients are placed on disability costing everybody more money as well as loosing the productivity of these people not working. This in spite of programs that make it financially desirable to hire these people. The 7% rule really makes since because it will at least get the companies looking at the people with disabilities. As to costs, this will likely be a non-issue since there are plenty of tax and direct grant benefits.

Since this magazine's looking on the side of the businesses, most likely not. It seems the thing to do now is to write something like this and then neglect, forget or ignore the very people the article, paper or whatever's about. Interviewing some people with disabilities, especially those (like me) who haven't held long-term paying jobs in or even close to the fields they're looking for work in must be a forethought to writing such an article. To me, this seems like it wouldn't be rocket science, but it seems to have become just that.

One thing I'd love to see this article (and magazine) cover is the 70+ percent of employable blind people who aren't employed (Some haven't even had the chance to have been employed especially in the fields they want to enter.). Of those around 30% of employed blind people, 90+ percent are employed due to their ability to read braille. What I see here are standard non-discriminated, one size fits all statistics on the disability community as a whole. I only see a select few people quoted and commented upon from mainly cognitive and/or visible disabilities.

I'm curious if individuals with disabilities were asked for their views, since the article references employees that are disabled. It's difficult to have this conversation without speaking to those impacted.

I work in management consulting and am curious how this would apply to service providers. It seems hard to imagine any of the major consulting firms being able to meet this mandate. I'm all for equality, but not sure this will make things better.

Having been a involved with the NewEngland Chapter of the Special Library Association I can attest that there are persons with disabilities working inmanagement consulting. I also haverecent career experience working in a health care consulting focusing on knowledgemanagement. Persons with disabilities areworking now. heart attack? That is onevery common disability and many times a person needs to change jobs.

My experience with Disabilities

As a person with a disability who benefited from the disabilities civil rights movement of the 1960’s 1970’s (My adventures of almost not getting aneducation is whole other topic).

This article one reason why I have gone back to school to shift careerdirections to Vocational Rehabilitation in addresses workplace barriers to employing persons disabilities . This includes not only persons who are currentlydisability but also a currently whobecomes disabled either due to medical condition or industrial accent or even war. . Under this scope there is also the need toprovide protection under the ADA for persons who have to care for persons with disabilities.\

There are many people with disabilities in the workplace that don't divulge their problems during hiring or after. Having a disability does not mean a person cannot be a consultant. 10% of the world's population have disabilities. There are lots of us out there and lots of us who can handle high stress jobs (with the right accommodations.) I think with this reform employers will find their employees to be more honest about their struggles and will be able to count some of their current employees into their ratios. That said I'm not sure if consulting firms are getting the type of federal funding this article is talking about.

Great article..However, I wish the writer would have been more sensitive to disability etiquette in her word choice. It is suggested to use "an employee with a disability", rather than a "disabled employee" (which alludes to 'inability'--rather than ability). Perhaps the editor can help for next time. Here's our youtube playlist on 'disability etiquette' (including word choice)--afterall, we're all here to make a difference and contribute! http://www.youtube.com/playlis.... If we can help--more than happy to!